What's new
  • ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!

Marijuana smokers face rapid lung destruction?

Kizzattack

Member
EatCannabisRaw said:
I think we want to protect this right of cannabis smoking that has been thoroughly raped and taken from us by the US government. Thats why we hold onto it with "bias"... because there are enough people trying to take it away.

I think its possible a lot of issues with cannabis come to how it is grown. With the advent of indoor growing there is lots more cannabis grown with oil-based fertilizers. From the stuff I've read on cannabisculture.com, these fertilizers can get into the pot (obviously). Some of the fertilizers have high amounts of radioactive plutonium (and who knows what else). Cancer causing.

Who knows what else all these other toxic chemicals do to you...

Fulla Nayak died at like 125...she smoked a blunt a day. I bet you it was good outdoor indian weed...organic and free of all that toxic crap cannabis is being grown in today with all the hydroponic stuff.

I think its a sad fact that not only did the government take away our right to smoke marijuana...but because of the fear we are forced to go indoors and for many that means oil-based toxic fertilizers/chemicals! And thats what we end up smoking WITH the marijuana!
Interesting you should say that. I grow 100% organic purely for this reason. It seems that synthetic fertalizers contain carcinogens (contained in hydrocarbons) that are causing the problems. These hydrocarbons seem to be derived from petrolium. It also makes sense that what we put in the plant is what we smoke, so whoever is growing the Cannabis can pretty much do whatever they want to it to make it worse or better for the lungs.
 
Last edited:

Grat3fulh3ad

The Voice of Reason
Veteran
Kizzattak, What nutrients are you talking about when you say "Synthetic"?
I use General Hydroponics Flora Micro and Bloom, and nothing in them is synthetic... just mined minerals which have been refined to remove the toxic or unwanted elements.
None of the ions plants eat can even be synthesized, unless there is a new cheap way to create atoms which I haven't heard about yet... and if there is I am going to start synthesizing Gold atoms instead...
 
G

Guest

Smoking cannabis flowered with tiger bloom is known to increase penis size.
 

Grat3fulh3ad

The Voice of Reason
Veteran
blockheader said:
Smoking cannabis flowered with tiger bloom is known to increase penis size.
Yes,
But,
Smoking flowered cannabis blooms with a tiger is known to be hazardous... And that's what this thread is about...
Ways to make cannabis smoking harmful...
Like holding your breath when you smoke (or vape) it.... Or by deeply inhaling particulate substances (like smoke) to full lung capacity....
 

Crazy Composer

Mushkeeki Gitigay • Medicine Planter
Mentor
ICMag Donor
Veteran
Smoking anything is hazardous.. but... in the case of high-grade marijuana, there's simply no way you're going to tell all these hippies who have smoked without troubles for several straight decades that they're now in some sort of imminent danger. I'd rather be a pot smoker than to not be one... That's my official scientific finding.

Also, the amount you smoke every day is important to note... I used to smoke TONS of dope, all day long. Now I smoke a couple joints a day, and NEVER hold it in for dear life. All my inhalations last for no more 3-4 seconds. Holding hits in for too long is a quick way to load your lungs with nastiness.

Another thing to think about is extra shit smoked with your weed. WAY too many folks will smoke tiny pieces of lint and hair in their weed because they never looked closely enough at the herb before smoking it. I want to smoke herb, NOT herb and lint. Every bud I smoke is METICULOUSLY inspected in ample light, against a dark background. Every single piece of alien material is removed before I break the bud up. You'd be surprised at how often there's something to be removed, that you wouldn't have noticed if you just gave it a quick look.

And of course harsh, black-burning weed is terrible for the lungs. If you can hear your lungs wheezing when you exhale, it's time to slow way down for a while, and find cleaner smoke to inhale.
 
G

Guest

If I felt a site or a certain type of site on the net was the most biased in their opinions I would not visit those sites. Why do You Lemon/journies even bother coming here ? Neither of you (if you're not 1 in the same) have proven to be anything but argumentative and guilty of exactly what you wish others to believe about those that do not agree with your views. Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black to me. Why have most of the threads journies has started/posted in recently gotten tossed in the bin ? Hmmmm ... Dude can't even give a straight answer to a simple question and is a fond fan of putting his words in someone elses mouth.
 
Last edited:

devilgoob

Active member
Veteran
Good job grat3fulh3ad...especially pointing out the sample size was 10 and they probably dont know how to smoke marijuana. They were probably holding it in, and I would believe if the govt funded this, then the prescreened them with a questionnaire and liked the results. Just like im not biased about the hazards of smoke, i am not biased toward choosing the "expert" opinion either, they are wrong sometimes or their study wasnt conducted right, and a lot of the time another party decides to investigate and finds the opposite.
 

immaculate

Member
The test is bullyshit in so many ways.

And honestly guys, the science of common sense tells us that. Just take it from all the old heads.

Besides, they're wrong from the very beginning with their statistics. Experience tells me that a lot more than 10% of young adults and 1% of adults smokes pot.
 

Grat3fulh3ad

The Voice of Reason
Veteran
If the radioactivity really does come from Polonium and Lead from apatate, and not from the radioactive potassium and carbon... Then I'm glad I use GenHy, so the heavy metals get refined out...
n the refining process, these mineral salts are purified to remove heavy metal contaminants and toxic substances that could harm plants or people.
 

Crazy Composer

Mushkeeki Gitigay • Medicine Planter
Mentor
ICMag Donor
Veteran
From the radioactivity point-of-view, it seems nothing can beat simple organics.

I'm sure PBP (and others like it) has higher levels of radioactivity than the true, simple organic methods too.

It makes perfect sense that tobacco-related cancer has increased since the introduction of non-organic fertilizers.

Looks like I might be going back to chicken shit and bone and blood meals. I know there's a perfect happy-medium to be found with organic soil mixes indoors. It has to be a light mix, but perfectly blended to be depleted by harvest. Tricky, but definitely possible, and worth it... radioactively speaking. :) hehehe

2673-radiactive-chart.jpg
 

fulltimehuman

Active member
journies said:
Yes, a sample size of 10 isn't too impressive. I don't understand why they choose small samples like this. There must be a reason...you'd think....

I agree. Not only is it "not too impressive" as you state, But completely
inadequate to gain any "SCIENTIFIC" understanding of the effects. 10
people? Did they smoke hash? Leaf? bong resin?
I have to point out that although "peer reviewed" in journals medicine itself is a "practice", so they let you know whence they came right there.

My first question would be; does a Respitory MD stand to benefit from stating MJ causes disease x, y, or z. The answer would be yes.
Is there a connection? If it smells like shit you don't need to lick your shoe.

I get 'bonchitis' also , and am suffering from "Eminent Death Syndrome"
so, if it's the weed that takes me out in the end. At least I'll be with loved ones!
 

HAPPYTREE

Member
Wher i live the rate of asthma and lung cancer is through the roof. This is from small diesel particulate from ships in the nearby port and all the goods on semi trucks leaving the port. The govt,state, city dosnt care they have actually just decided to expand the freeway and run more goods. FUGGERS

Im also sure taking bong rips every day 4 the last 14 yrs has done wonders for my lungs LOL
Ill smoke what i want

HT
 

Grat3fulh3ad

The Voice of Reason
Veteran
I have to wonder, at what concentrations the various lines were tested (i.e. how uniform were the tests)...

I also have to wonder what the levels in most of those organic products would be after supplementing the necessary potassium and micros... After all the potassium in the GH is most likely the source of the radiation...

I guess the most telling thing one could discover, would be the exact source of the radiation in each of the different products...

Seems to me, that much more telling is the rise in cancer rates would be things like the general rise in background radiation and in exposure to 'hot spot' radiation (driving under high voltage lines or near power plants or transformer stations or 4 inches from your cell phone or in front of your microwave oven), or the prevalance of artificial hormones in our food supply, the thinning of the ozone, and the poisoning of our atmosphere...

If there were any proof that there was radioactive lead and polonium in general hydroponic nutrients, then the organics industry would be all over the story, making sure there was publicity o plenty (unless their radiation comes from the same sources, I guess), So I have to assume that the explanation which Gen Hy gives for their radiation to be a fairly accurate one.
 

Pops

Resident pissy old man
Veteran
I have to agree with CrownedSparrow and H3ad, that 10 is an extremely small sample, especially if these people are from the same geographical area. Could be caused by air pollution or a number of other factors. Seems only mj tokers were studied. Where are the non-mj smokers for a control group? Were any of them examined? Interesting study, but not terribly conclusive with a sample of only 10. I have C.O.P.D., and if I admitted to mj smoking, it automatically would have been the cause of my disease and not the 46 years of tobacco use.
 
Top